Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 8 Jul 2015

Vol. 886 No. 3

Topical Issue Debate

Tracker Mortgage Data

Deputy Jim Daly

I thank the Minister for coming to the House to take this issue. I refer him to 1 July 2014 when I asked the following parliamentary question:

To ask the Minister for Finance the number of mortgage holders of each financial institution operating here whose repayment schedule and interest rate was either aligned to at the time or due to be converted to an ECB tracker rate at a point in the future who have since converted to a variable rate, waived entitlement to a tracker rate for the period of 2008 to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The Minister's response was:

The Central Bank has advised me that they do not publish the information requested by the Deputy.

That suggests to me that the Central Bank possesses this information but does not publish it. I went into the Central Bank, and wrote to it, asking if it would provide me with the information which I, as a public representative, sought. Following a further letter to the Governor, I was surprised to receive a call from the director of consumer affairs in the Central Bank who had discussed the matter and my letter with the Governor. The Governor asked him to call me directly before responding to my letter. I will read into the record a transcript of what I noted after that call on 3 September 2014.

My office received a call today from Bernard Sheridan of the Central Bank of Ireland. I returned the call at 15.05 approx on Sept 3rd 2014 and spoke with Mr. Sheridan. After 11 minutes of verbal procrastination and [circumlocution] on a scale I have not witnessed for a while, Mr. Sheridan eventually acknowledged that the Central Bank does know the amount of mortgage accounts moved from tracker rates to variable rates - but only for accounts in arrears.

I requested this information despite being told previously in writing that the CB does not have that info - from the CB. After initially side stepping the question on numerous occasions and using vast amounts of verbiage - Mr. Sheridan under forced very direct questioning admitted being in possession of the numbers I requested and eventually agreed to furnish me with the numbers again stressing only for those in arrears.

The phone call from Mr. Sheridan began along the lines of The CB does not believe that the Banks are engaging in any practice to encourage borrowers to move off trackers - explicitly used the word "believe" which I took issue with and advised Mr. Sheridan that as a representative of the public who remain traumatised by the events of recent years and are not trusting of banks and the system of Governance - I wanted to know does the CB know the amount of [mortgage-holders who have been moved from a tracker rate to a variable rate].

Mr. Sheridan repeatedly obfuscated before finally relenting after vigorous questioning. I hope that this call has been recorded at the CB.

Some 11 months on, almost to the day on which I first submitted the parliamentary question, I have had a meeting with the Central Bank and have numerous pages of correspondence. I received a letter last month, on 24 June. It states:

You will note in particular that all lenders have confirmed that, as a matter of policy, they do not and have not required [private dwelling-home] borrowers to move from a tracker mortgage rate to a more unfavourable rate during the lifetime of the mortgage. During our inspection, we found no evidence to suggest that this is not the case. However, we identified some weaknesses in lenders' monitoring of compliance with these policies.

To this day, I remain confused, exasperated and unsure of how to get the information. I am at a complete loss to understand how the Central Bank does not know how many mortgages have been moved in the last number of years from a tracker rate to a variable rate. I was told on the telephone that it has the information while I was told in letters, it does do not have it. In all the correspondence, I have been told about policy, waving words around and playing with language, but I still cannot get the information.

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan)

I thank Deputy Jim Daly for raising this issue. I am not sure my scripted response will be an appropriate answer to the issues he has raised now, but I will read it anyway and we can talk about it at the end.

As Deputies will be aware, the code of conduct on mortgage arrears, CCMA, provides a strong consumer protection framework for borrowers. One of the elements contained in the code is protection for borrowers who have tracker rate mortgages. Recent data published by the Central Bank indicate that 52%, or approximately €60 billion, of the balances outstanding for credit advanced to Irish resident households for home purchases is at a tracker rate. At the outset, it is important to state that lenders cannot remove a borrower's tracker rate just because the borrower is in arrears. The Central Bank has published guidance to support borrowers and the website keepingyourhoime.ie also has information to assist borrowers. Furthermore, there are a number of support bodies, such as the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, that can provide essential assistance to borrowers who are dealing with arrears.

On the issue of tracker mortgages specifically, the Central Bank has carefully considered whether there are any circumstances which would merit a lender offering a borrower an arrangement which would result in the borrower changing from his or her existing tracker rate and concluded that there may be exceptional cases where this could arise in order to prevent the borrower losing his or her home. Consequently, the CCMA provides that the lender must not require the borrower to change from an existing tracker mortgage to another mortgage type, as part of any alternative repayment arrangement offered to the borrower, except in prescribed circumstances.

Provision 39 of the CCMA requires that in order to determine which options for alternative repayment arrangements are viable for each particular case, a lender must explore all of the options offered by that lender. If the lender concludes that none of the options that would allow the borrower to retain his or her tracker interest rate is appropriate and sustainable for the borrower's individual circumstances, provision 46 of the CCMA provides that the lender may offer the borrower an alternative repayment arrangement which requires the borrower to change from an existing tracker mortgage to another mortgage type, if the proposed alternative repayment arrangement satisfies the following conditions: all other options, which would retain the tracker rate, have been considered to be unsustainable; it is affordable for the borrower; and it is a long-term sustainable solution which is consistent with Central Bank of Ireland policy on sustainability.

In addition, the CCMA requires lenders to explain in the offer letter the reasons the alternative arrangement offered is considered to be appropriate and sustainable as well as the advantages and any disadvantages or potential disadvantages of any arrangement offered, with regard to the individual circumstances of the borrower. Furthermore, and importantly, lenders must engage with the Central Bank on any proposal to avail of provision 46 of the CCMA. This means there are further strong protections in place. The Central Bank has indicated that to date no lender has engaged with it on developing any such products.

This was also confirmed in the outcome of the Central Bank's recently published report on its themed inspection on compliance with the code of conduct on mortgage arrears. During this inspection all lenders confirmed that, as a matter of policy, they do not require, and have not required, borrowers to move from a tracker mortgage rate to a more unfavourable rate during the lifetime of the mortgage.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brian Walsh)

I am sorry to interrupt the Minister. He will have an opportunity to come back in. The time as elapsed.

Deputy Jim Daly

I thank the Minister for his response. In essence, we are part of a government of a very stressed society and people rightly expect their public representatives to demand accountability. While I am proud of our record as a Government on many fronts, this is an issue on which the record will show I have been seeking answers for 12 months, almost to the day.

It is simple and straightforward. As somebody humbled and honoured to represent the people as a Member of this House, I requested first the Minister and then the Central Bank to answer the straight question as to how many accounts under the governance of the Irish banks have been moved from a tracker rate to a variable rate, because the evidence of which I am aware suggests a number of them have been moved? It is a practice that must be examined. It is despicable if the banks are taking advantage of borrowers under duress and stress and encouraging them off their tracker rates onto variable rates.

The bigger issue is that the Central Bank, which governs and monitors the banks - that is not my duty, as a public representative, or the Minister's - cannot or will not provide me with the answer to that one question I have sought for 12 months. It has sent me around the houses and down every avenue rather than provide me with it.

The Central Bank talks about policy. My personal assistant and I met a number of the officials in the Central Bank. We asked, ahead of their last investigation into the banks and the report they was compiling, if they would specifically ask each bank how many accounts had moved and yet they have come back to me again with the same nonsense on what the policy is. I am not interested in the policy. I would appreciate it if the Minister would commit today to getting the information that I seek from the Central Bank and, by extension, from all the banks.

Deputy Michael Noonan

I thank Deputy Jim Daly.

The Central Bank is independent and I cannot compel it to provide the Deputy with the information he requests. However, I will get my officials to forward copies of Deputy Jim Daly's interventions today to the Governor of the Central Bank and ask him to provide the Deputy with the information requested or, if he is unable to do that, to provide an explanation as to why he is unable to do so.

Suicide Prevention

Deputy Dan Neville

I welcome the opportunity to raise the recently published report, Connecting for Life: Ireland's National Strategy to Reduce Suicide 2015-2020. It is an important report, widely accepted nationally and internationally and warmly welcomed by the head of the mental health services in the World Health Organization at the launch by the Taoiseach in Dublin.

For a number of years, we have discussed the difficulties experienced by the State in determining the levels of suicide. The most recent statistics for 2014 show that 459 persons - 368 males and 91 females - took their own lives, but undetermined deaths numbered 62. In Northern Ireland and Britain and in Europe, undetermined deaths are counted as suicide. There is a reluctance among some coroners to bring in a verdict of suicide because of the stigma and the difficulties experienced and felt still by some families, even though there have been many efforts made to reduce the stigma around suicide. Of course, there are some suicides, such as single-occupant road traffic accidents, which cannot be identified. We would not want to exaggerate the numbers either - I have heard very exaggerated numbers in that regard - but international research in an Irish context would put it at between eight and 15. There are also drownings that cannot be identified and other tragedies that are seen as accidents but, in fact, are suicide.

Compare the 459 suicides last year with the number of road traffic deaths, which is unfortunately on the increase at 196. Our suicide levels are a little below the European average, but our rate of youth suicide is the fourth highest in Europe after Lithuania, Estonia and Finland. We have a particular problem in this regard.

The question that is always asked is why did someone take his or her life. Many studies have been done on this complex matter and we want a simple answer, but there is no simple answer to most suicides.

Addressing suicidal behaviour means supporting people in many different ways and requires a co-ordinated effort across many different sectors and levels of society. Connecting for Life is designed to co-ordinate and focus the efforts of a broad range of government departments, state agencies, non-statutory organisations and local communities in suicide prevention.

This is a quote from the report. To continue:

Usually no single cause or risk factor is sufficient to explain a suicidal act. Most commonly, several risk factors act cumulatively to increase an individual's vulnerability to suicidal behaviour, and risk factors interplay in different ways for different populations, groups and individuals.

In Ireland [and internationally], one in four people will use a mental health service at some stage of their lives. Research shows a strong link between mental health difficulties and death by suicide. In high-income countries, mental health problems are present in up to 90% of people who die by suicide.

I would say that everyone who dies by suicide is suffering from some level of mental ill health, although perhaps not a mental illness.

Minister for Health (Deputy Leo Varadkar)

I thank Deputy Neville for raising this issue. I am taking this Topical Issue debate on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, who is abroad on Government business.

We are all too aware that a death by suicide does not just affect family and close friends, but a community as a whole. The sometimes unanswerable questions of why, if only and what if reverberate around the community. It is at that time that those dealing with a death by suicide need to find support to make sense of what has happened, deal with their grief and learn how to live with their loss.

Sadly, too many lives in this country are lost to suicide. While we will never eliminate it completely, we should make every effort to reduce the number of lives lost by ensuring that there is a co-ordinated partnership of a broad range of Departments, State agencies, non-statutory organisations and, perhaps most importantly, local communities in tackling this issue.

Dealing with the current high levels of suicide and deliberate self-harm has been, and continues to be, a priority for the Government. As the House will be aware, the previous suicide prevention strategy, Reach Out, came to the end of its ten-year term at the end of 2014. The Minister of State requested the Department of Health and the HSE to develop a new strategic framework for suicide prevention, building on the work and achievements of Reach Out. The new strategy, Connecting for Life, which was launched by An Taoiseach and the Minister of State on 24 June, sets out a vision of an Ireland where fewer lives are lost through suicide and where communities and individuals are empowered to improve their mental health and well-being through a number of specific goals, including a better understanding of suicidal behaviour, supporting communities to prevent and respond to suicidal behaviour, safe and high-quality services and improved access, consistency and integration of services.

Connecting for Life is much more than a vision. It provides a detailed and clear plan to achieve each of the goals it proposes, with defined actions and a lead agency and key partners in place for each individual objective. This action plan will be supported by robust implementation and governance structures and resourcing and communications frameworks. Monitoring and evaluation will be embedded into the implementation process, progress will be tracked and the impact of the strategy will be objectively measured against baseline indicators. The agreed implementation structure sets out clear lines of responses and accountability at all levels: political, administrative and local. The National Office for Suicide Prevention, NOSP's role and authority to support the implementation of the strategy is clearly set out.

Suicide is a complex problem and addressing suicidal behaviour means supporting people in many different ways. It also requires a co-ordinated effort across many different sectors and levels of society, for example, service providers, communities, families and friends. Connecting for Life places a significant value on partnerships and is designed to co-ordinate and focus the efforts of a broad range of Departments, State agencies, non-statutory organisations and local communities in suicide prevention. It is the Government's hope that the implementation of this new strategy will help us to achieve our goal of fewer lives lost through suicide.

Deputy Dan Neville

I thank the Minister for his reply. I also thank him and the Minister of State for their investment in developing mental health resources. I congratulate and recognise the work of the NOSP under Mr. Gerry Raleigh, who has done a good job. I commend the Government on increasing the amount of money that is given to the NOSP from €4.3 million to €8.7 million.

I wish to ask about the report and Reach Out. The department of economics at NUI Galway calculated the cost of suicide to the State in 2001 as being €906 million. Reach Out included a special section on the economic cost of suicide. Perhaps we could determine today's figure. In this country, economics often talk as much as, or more than, other factors that we might hope would be given more attention.

It is important that we invest in services to those bereaved by suicide. They are a special group and face special difficulties.

Deputy Leo Varadkar

I have not interrogated those figures, but I do not doubt that there is a considerable economic cost to suicide, not least through lost productivity. Unfortunately, there is no way of capturing that amount or levying people who did not commit suicide so as to generate revenue. While the cost is real, there is no way of capturing and spending it, which I am sure the Deputy understands. However, it is appreciated that funding for the office has doubled under this Government and that further investment will be needed in the coming years in order to implement the strategy, subject to budgets. As the Minister of State pointed out, it is not all about money, but other factors as well. I agree with Deputy Neville that it is important to provide bereavement counselling and other bereavement services for the families affected.

Northern Ireland Issues

Deputy Brendan Smith

I appreciate the Ceann Comhairle giving me the opportunity to discuss this important issue, which I am raising again following a number of meetings that I have had with relatives of those innocent people who were victims of awful actions taken through the collusion of British state forces with terrorist organisations in Northern Ireland. There is a growing frustration among the relatives that they are being left in the dark about plans to review the horrific actions of those individuals and there is increasing concern that the truth will never come to light.

My party and I understand that dealing with the past is an important part of the Stormont House Agreement and that the implementation of that agreement has stalled due to a failure to agree on certain welfare levels in Northern Ireland. However, l am asking the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to consider this issue with clear eyes. Failing to progress matters that go to the core of justice within Northern Ireland due to a dispute over welfare changes would strike anyone from these islands or beyond as inexcusable.

Having listened to the stories of many victims' relatives, I believe that it is time for both Governments and the parties to the Stormont House Agreement to re-engage in a meaningful way and seek the full implementation of that agreement. Certain parties' abdication of their responsibilities relating to their previous commitments made under the agreement is shocking. Victims and their families continue to be denied the truth and basic justice.

It is not acceptable that efforts to find out the truth about atrocities such as the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the murder of Pat Finucane, the murderous behaviour of the Glenanne gang and the activities of the Mount Vernon UVF gang are still being delayed. We have to realise that many families, both North and South, are continuing to suffer because of those atrocities and because they have been denied the basic truth.

When I raised this matter on the floor of the House recently, the Minister, Deputy Charles Flanagan, assured me he would raise the reasonable demands contained in the all-party motions passed in this House in 2008 and 2011, which called for an independent international judicial figure to be given access to all material held by the British Government with regard to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. I appreciate that the Minister has consistently raised that matter with the Secretary of State, Theresa Villiers. My party leader, Deputy Martin, and I have also raised this issue in a number of meetings with Ms Villiers and the British ambassador. In his most recent response to me in this House, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade assured me that the Secretary of State is "actively considering" the matter. I would appreciate it if the Minister could give me an update on that. Has any progress been made in ensuring access to those papers is given to an independent eminent legal person?

The allegations surrounding the collusion of British state forces with loyalist paramilitaries need to be investigated fully. I ask the Government to continue to pursue this matter with the utmost urgency. Recent RTE and BBC programmes exposed the level of violence that was unleashed when the British state colluded with vicious paramilitary groups on this island. There is a duty on all agencies to ensure the murderers responsible for such heinous crimes are brought to justice. The full truth is needed in the interests of true reconciliation. The horror of the Troubles inflicted by the Provisional IRA and other so-called republican groups, loyalist paramilitaries and agents of the British security forces must be fully exposed.

Deputy Leo Varadkar

I thank Deputy Smith for raising this issue. I am taking this debate on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan. Recent RTE and BBC documentaries presented a shocking account of allegations of collusion that span three decades. In the first instance, our thoughts are with the families and relatives of those who were murdered in these events, and for whom the documentaries must have been deeply upsetting. The hurt caused by the murder of their loved ones in such vicious circumstances is compounded by the knowledge that elements of the British security forces colluded with such callous crimes. It is a matter of public record that collusion between State forces and paramilitaries occurred during the Troubles. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade outlined during a previous Topical Issue debate on this matter on 17 June last, successive Irish Governments have raised the issue of collusion with the British Government in ongoing bilateral relations and through the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg. The Minister is continuing to raise the issue of collusion, including in relation to a number of individual cases of long-standing concern, such as the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the killing of Pat Finucane. He advocates that all relevant documentation should be made available to be examined by the appropriate mechanisms. Such cases must be adequately addressed if we are to achieve a genuinely reconciled and shared society.

Many families, including those bereaved by incidents in which collusion has been alleged, continue to deal not only with the awful pain of losing a loved one, but also with the struggle for answers decades after these traumatic events. The Minister and I understand and acknowledge the frustration of families that have had to contend for too long with inadequate mechanisms for addressing their cases. For that reason, the establishment of a new comprehensive framework for dealing with the past, as envisaged in the Stormont House agreement, remains a priority for the Government. We believe these mechanisms offer the best hope of helping the thousands of families touched by the Troubles, including those affected by collusion. These institutions will include a historical investigations unit to take forward investigations into Troubles-related deaths, as well as an independent commission on information retrieval to enable victims and survivors to seek and privately receive information about Troubles-related deaths. Good progress is being made on the establishment of these institutions, which we believe will assist all victims, including victims of collusion, in their quest for justice and truth.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I thank the Minister for his reply. In her book Lethal Allies, Anne Cadwallader recounts the stories of 120 people who were murdered by loyalist gangs, some of which were armed from UDR depots. With one exception - a person who was linked to the IRA - none of those 120 people was involved in violence. They were citizens going about their daily work and included active members of the SDLP, the GAA and other local community organisations. I wish to refer to a desperate atrocity for which the murderer or murderers have never been brought to justice. In Lethal Allies, Ms Cadwallader explains:

In between the Dublin bombings of 1 December 1972 and 20 January 1973, Fermanagh-based members of the UDR and UVF carried out three bombings within an hour - in Clones (County Monaghan), Belturbet (County Cavan) [both of which are in my constituency] and Pettigo (County Donegal) - all on 28 December 1972. Two teenagers, Geraldine O'Reilly (aged fifteen) [from Belturbet] and Paddy Stanley (aged sixteen) [from Clara, County Offaly], were killed in Belturbet. Again, no one was brought to justice.

The Minister quite rightly referred to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, which, as we know, happened on 17 May 1974. Some 33 innocent people were killed and almost 300 people were wounded. That day witnessed the highest number of casualties on any single day during that awful period on this island known as the Troubles. We should always remember that the UVF claimed responsibility for those bombings in our capital city and in Monaghan in my own constituency. Various credible allegations that elements of the British security forces colluded with the UVF in those bombings are available as well. A number of years ago, an Oireachtas committee did excellent work following on from the Barron report. It termed the attacks of 17 May 1974 as an act of "international terrorism".

The Minister also referred to the recent BBC and RTE documentaries. All of us were probably aware of the individual incidents, but when we watched the programme it was really chilling to see how it put a background to the carnage and horror that were inflicted on so many innocent people. I had the privilege and honour of being able to speak during the debates in 2008 and 2011 when this House unanimously carried motions calling on the British Government to give access to all papers pertaining to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings to an international independent eminent judicial person. Unfortunately, the British Government has refused to accede to this fair request, which was made by a sovereign Parliament. I appreciate that the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, intends to talk to the Minister, Deputy Charles Flanagan, about this matter. I put it to both Ministers that it is of the utmost importance for the Government to use every forum available to it at political and public administration levels to call on the British Government to respond positively to the requests of this sovereign Parliament. The minimum that the families deserve is the truth. These murderers must be brought to justice. I refer not only to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings but also to the bombing I have mentioned in County Cavan, which is in my constituency. I know the two families that lost young teenagers on that desperate night at Christmas 1972.

Deputy Leo Varadkar

I assure the Deputy that we will continue to raise these long-standing cases, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, with the British Government. The Stormont House agreement provides for new ways to investigate the past and facilitate information recovery and for victims and survivors to share their experiences. The Government continues to prioritise the implementation of the agreement, not least because those who suffered the loss of a loved one, or were themselves victims of violence during the Troubles, deserve the best means possible of dealing with the legacy of the past. In that regard, they continue to have the total support and commitment of the Government. I undertake to convey what Deputy Smith has said today to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. I will make sure the Minister is aware of it, if he is not already.

Back to School Costs

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

We raise this issue at this time every year. Students are no sooner out of school on their summer holidays than parents start to worry and fret about the cost of sending them back to school at the end of August and the start of September. The Minister, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, may be aware of the recent publication of a survey by the Irish League of Credit Unions.

It indicates the financial pressures parents find themselves under when sending their children back to school. I acknowledge that there were some positives in that report. For example, the cost of sending a child back to primary school has reduced from €122 to €116. However, the cost of sending a child to post-primary school has risen significantly.

When one looks at the report and listens to what parents tell us, it is clear this is a huge issue. A total of 70% of the parents surveyed said that the cost of sending their children back to school will negatively impact on their ability to pay basic household bills. Furthermore, 16% of families who responded said that they will have to sacrifice spending on food to meet the costs of sending their children back to school. A total of 16% of families in this State who are sending children back to school face the situation of having to reduce their grocery bills to meet back to school costs.

The education committee has examined this issue and put forward recommendations. While I agree with the Minister on many matters, I have said from that outset that when I believe she is not doing enough to tackle an issue I will call her out on it. She is not doing enough on this issue. To be honest, she is not doing anything about it. She has put the responsibility back on the shoulders of parents to lobby the boards of management in respect of back-to-school costs. That is simply not good enough. The Oireachtas Library & Research Service research unit did a research paper on this for me. It states, and the education committee and I agree, that the Minister has statutory powers under the Education Act 1998 to make recommendations on this or any issue which affects schools. In fact, a previous Fianna Fáil Minister made recommendations in 2008 on the issue of school uniforms.

School uniforms are one of the huge costs in sending children back to school. Another is the cost of school books. On top of that there is the cost of voluntary contributions, which average €112. In my experience as a parent, many of these voluntary contributions are not voluntary. In many cases students who do not pay the voluntary contribution do not have access to lockers, libraries and other school facilities. There is nothing voluntary about these contributions.

In recent years there has been a decrease in capitation grants for schools. Schools are trying to operate on less funding with more students and they are unable to make ends meet. The burden is falling back onto the shoulders of parents. The Minister must confront this issue.

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Jan O'Sullivan)

I have seen the report of the Irish League of Credit Unions to which the Deputy refers. I thank the Deputy for raising this issue as it is hugely important for parents throughout Ireland. I welcome the opportunity to debate it in the House.

Everybody accepts that back-to-school costs place a burden on families. The Government is taking action to help reduce those costs and to provide direct support to those families that need it most. There are four areas I wish to mention - the cost of school books, the cost of uniforms, voluntary contributions and the payment of back-to-school allowances.

With regard to textbook costs, an agreement was reached by my predecessor with the Irish Educational Publishers' Association which resulted in the agreement of a code of practice. The code commits the publishers to limit the publication of new editions and to maintaining editions of books in print unchanged for at least six years. The publishers have also given assurances that they will sell textbooks to schools at discounts so schools can purchase textbooks in bulk to stock book rental schemes.

Book rental schemes are the most effective method of reducing the cost of school books for parents across the country. Since we came into Government, school book grants have been protected, and we also increased the investment to ensure that all schools can offer book rental schemes. We spent approximately €6.7 million in 2014 to give seed capital to 400 schools that do not have book rental schemes so they could establish them. In 2015 and 2016, we are increasing that investment to give additional support to the other schools which already had book rental schemes established before that point, to allow them to expand their schemes. In total, we have invested €15.6 million specifically on expanding book rental schemes over these three years. This is on top of the €15 million spent annually on book grants for schools, which can be used for the maintenance and upkeep of book rental stock.

The National Parents' Council surveyed the views of its members on the book rental schemes that are currently operating. Parents have reported that where book rental schemes operate, they are open to all parents in 95% of cases and that the cost per child is under €40 per year in a considerable majority of schools. Perhaps most tellingly, the survey found that 93% of parents believe that book rental schemes help with the costs of educating a child. The Government has shown a clear commitment to investing in book rental schemes, and we have every intention of continuing to do so.

School uniforms are a more challenging area, and I am aware that Deputy O'Brien has made some suggestions in that regard. Obviously the approach we are taking on book rental schemes cannot be replicated for school uniforms. Nevertheless, I strongly believe that lowering costs should be the primary factor in school uniform policies. Individual schools have the right to decide on their policy in this area, but I am anxious to have greater consultation and the involvement of parents in these decisions. I recall the frustration of stitching a school crest onto a jumper each year as my son grew bigger over the years. Many other parents are obliged to do that where the school has an embedded school crest on the school uniform. I do not believe there should be such crests. A generic option should be chosen.

My focus is on giving parents a greater say in school policies that affect them. I will be working in the coming months on a parents and students charter that will give a greater role to parents in formulating policies such as these. As the Deputy suggested, perhaps a Minister can be more clear in terms of directing schools but a parents and students charter will give more clout, as it were, to parents in this regard.

Regarding voluntary contributions, we all know that these are requested by many, but not all, schools in Ireland. One point on which the Deputy will agree is that there is a clear need for parents to know that such contributions must be voluntary. There can be no compunction involved. My Department is ready and willing to take action where there are any allegations of pressure on parents or students. I am anxious to see the reliance on voluntary contributions in schools diminished.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brian Walsh)

The Minister must conclude as she is over time.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

I acknowledge that there have been reductions in capitation but that is one of the areas I hope to be able to examine in the budget. I should also refer to the back to school clothing and footwear allowance.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

The code of practice regarding books is voluntary. There is no evidence to suggest it is reducing costs. One of the matters I have raised personally with the Minister and in the education committee is the need to look at the effectiveness of that voluntary code of practice. If it is not working, it should be put on a statutory basis. It must be made an enforceable code of practice.

With regard to school book rental schemes, I acknowledge that the Government finally has a policy that a school books rental scheme should be available in every school. On the subject of school books, one of the recommendations from the committee related to the use of workbooks. The use of workbooks should not be outlawed but it certainly should be reduced. They are a significant school book cost.

School uniforms are the third issue mentioned by the Minister. I do not accept that the Minister does not have the power under the Education Act 1998 to make recommendations which are binding on school boards of management in respect of the policy on school uniforms. The Minister used that Act previously for recommendations and regulations on mental health and bullying. The Minister has the power to make such recommendations. Previous Ministers have made recommendations on the issue of school uniforms.

The Minister has expressed the opinion that generic uniforms should become available. This is possible, but it will take political will on the part of the Minister to achieve. She must use her statutory powers to compel boards of management to act rather than making the wishy-washy statement that she wants parents to put pressure on boards of management. Parents are under enough pressure. As Minister she has responsibilities and powers, and she must use them.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

On the code of conduct on schoolbooks, I will examine whether the code is being implemented and, if not, I will decide whether it needs to be reviewed. I understand, however, that schools are adhering to it. Deputy O'Brien also referred to the possibility of placing the code of conduct on a statutory footing. I will first ascertain whether schools are adhering to it.

The Deputy and I probably agree that the book rental schemes are good.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

The issue is workbooks.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

Different schools have adopted different practices. In some schools, workbooks come under the rental scheme. While I am aware that these books cannot be reused, anecdotally, I understand that in some cases parents who rent the book that accompanies the workbook also receive a copy of the workbook. I admit this may not be the case in all schools.

With regard to my powers under the Act, my advice is that I do not have the power to require schools to have generic uniforms. For this reason, I am primarily concerned with using my power of persuasion. Parents' wishes also need to be taken into account, because parents dress their children and pay for their clothes. As the Deputy will be aware, some schools, primarily Educate Together schools, do not have school uniforms. As to whether one uses powers to require a school to have a uniform or not, I do not intend to change the current position under which schools are given a choice about having a uniform. In terms of uniform type, I am not sure whether a Minister can order schools to have a certain type of uniform.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

The Minister can certainly order schools to introduce a generic uniform.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

I am not sure that is the case. The advice I have received is that I cannot do so, but I will certainly examine the issue.

Generally speaking, we have made some progress, particularly in book rental schemes. It is good to have an opportunity to emphasise that the voluntary contribution is voluntary. The Department should be informed if schools are telling parents that the contribution is not voluntary and must be paid. There is an issue with the running costs of schools and I will certainly keep that matter under review, particularly in the context of the Estimates.